36 
separated by but a few miles and a mountain range, and with little 
difference in elevation, the brownest and best spotted undersides occur 
on the most thickly heather-covered moss, may be a coincidence. It 
may also be a coincidence that on Scotch mosses of which I have 
knowledge, the grey-green lichens, which are unnoticeable on the 
above Westmoreland mosses, form a much more conspicuous feature 
where the Scotch form, with little or no spotting on the green-grey 
hindwing, occurs. Whereas in the same family—in S. semele —where 
great variation in narrow limits (as in most of the allies) must be 
conceded to the underside, the effects of such amount of melanism or 
albinism as occurs, or of other alterations of colour and markings 
(unless of exceptional rarity), is not nearly so subversive of the usual 
effect as the common variation of the upperside, and where the 
exceptional aberrations occur, the same is true still in a less degree. 
And the phaneron would appear to be in these cases more variable 
than the crypton. But these examples are greatly in the minority 
probably among all species, so much so as to allow it to be stated that 
of all aberrations subversive of the usual effects as produced by the 
prevailing forms, those of the crypton are far more common 
than those of the phaneron in butterflies generally. Probably the 
same statement would hold true, without qualifications as to the 
subversive character of the variation. Such variations as are common 
in phanerons, may eventually prove to be adaptiye to surroundings 
entirely. In S. sewele the whitest forms of phaneron have been 
obtained in same locality as var. mnndataoi G. obscuraria, and the race 
here of semele tends to a usually white underside very strongly. And 
in justification of this belief, which leads one to definitely suggest that 
undersides have suffered some fairly general neglect in the field, in the 
cabinet, in philosophizing, a few reasons are given : — 
In the field how far do we find records of attitudes of more and 
of less complete rest and such, and of feeding, of sunning, of courting? 
And without knowing these well, is it possible to understand about the 
various patterns of undersides? Then their appearance from below and 
from above? The comparison of the highest sitting $ s of L. aegon, 
as compared with dark undersides of $ s seen from below against the 
late afternoon and evening sky, when they rest for sleep, is most 
suggestive. 
In the cabinet is it libel to say that mostly (in however long a series, 
10, 30, 70, etc.) it is a common thing to see two or only a few more 
undersides unless obvious aberrations ? How many collections show 
the appearance of the insect in any form of rest or sleep? One would 
have expected at least one wholly closed. 
In 'philosophizing , how few of us can forget the wonder caused by 
the first appreciation of the contrast between the upperside and 
underside ? Have we maintained any adequately equal interest in the 
underside ? Have many of us bestowed more than passing thought, 
on the really more marvellous contrast on one single wing in its two 
parts, viz., the underside of tbe upper wing of, say, .T. cardui, with 
the basal part even more beautifully tinted than the upperside, and 
the apical part with the effect of the underside of the underwing 
represented in a still more subdued degree, viz., of the crypton and the 
phaneron ? And as to descriptions, one offers two examples only: — 
xix. 
